Transcript

Let's take a look perhaps at the Ramban's Hakdama to his Peirush Al HaTorah. So the Ramban writes as follows:

בשם האל הגדול והנורא אחל לכתוב חידושים בפירוש התורה באימה ביראה ברתת בזיע במורא מתפלל ומתודה בלב נדכה ונפש שבורה.

So the Ramban says he's writing with tremendous awe and fear, as all the meforshim note that the Ramban is quoting from our Gemara in Brachos here earlier on kaf beis.

דתניא והודעתם לבניך ולבני בניך וכתיב יום אשר עמדת לפני השם אלוקיך בחורב מה להלן באימה ביראה ברתת ובזיע אף כאן.

So Torah was given, when we received Torah, it was again with this aggregate experience of eima, yirah, reses, zeya, the fear, the awe, the trembling, the shaking. So too l'doros, that's the way we're supposed to approach learning. That's what the Ramban is referencing. שואל סליחה מבקש מחילה וכפרה. What's he asking slicha mechila v'chapara for? So l'chora he means not only because he said in the previous line that he's misvadeh, but he means he's asking slicha mechila v'chapara for embarking on this endeavor of writing his Peirush Al HaTorah. I think that's clear from the way the Ramban continues that

שנפשי יודעת מאד ידיעה ברורה שאין ביצת הנמלה כנגד הגלגל העליון שעירה.

That the difference between the tininess of the egg of an ant compared to the, again, we would say the vast cosmos, he talks about the outer sphere, that that ratio is not as, that difference doesn't, doesn't equal, is less than the difference between כאשר חכמתי קטנה ודעתי קצרה כנגד סתרי תורה. And then again further clarifying that the slicha mechila v'chapara is about. The embarking upon this very endeavor, he says אבל מה אעשה ונפשי חשקה בתורה. So the Ramban's like this, if you look at the Ramban's other other hakdamos, the Ramban has a hakdama to Milchamos for instance. So there too, the Emes says that the Ramban does ask mechila for mistakes that he might make. But there's no comparison in terms of the focus, and this hakdama is is entirely different. The the depth of of the שואל סליחה ומבקש מחילה וכפרה. It's true in the case of Milchamos as the Ramban himself goes on to say, you know he's coming to defend the Rif. So as it were he's not staking out individual his own positions, he's coming to defend the Rif. In Sefer Hamitzvos, he's coming to defend the Bahag upon whom the Rambam was masig. And and there's a different that's not his mandate in the Perush Al HaTorah. Perush Al HaTorah he's he's coming lechatchila to say his own. And and that's certainly part of it. But yitachen that the Ramban here means something else as well. And yitachen he means something else as well. Even when the Ramban writes chidushim al Shas as as we obviously know that he did. And and in the chidushim al Shas again he's not he didn't assign himself the task of necessarily defending anyone else in in his chidushim al Shas. But he's coming to say pshat in what what the Amoraim said and meant, what the Tannaim said and meant. And yitachen that what you see reflected here is that as awesome an undertaking as that is and as much koved rosh as that warrants, it's Torah. But when you write chidushim on Chumash, you are presuming to comment directly on what Hakadosh Baruch Hu said. Not what Hakadosh Baruch Hu said as understood by the chachmei hamasora, but but in chidushim on Chumash, Tanach, but the Ramban wrote on Chumash, in chidushim on Chumash the meforesh is undertaking not to say how Beis Hillel or Beis Shammai understood a posuk in Chumash, but they're being misyaches directly to devar Hashem. That's takeh overwhelming. That's overwhelming. Even for the Ramban that's overwhelming. Yitachen also that when the Ramban alludes to the Gemara Brachos that we mentioned mentioned before when he says he's writing באימה ביראה ברתת ובזיע and take a look at that Gemara for a minute rabbosai. You have your Gemara Brachos? Take a look on kaf-beis, take a look. If you see where it says d'tanya around ten lines down, kaf-beis amud aleph, d'tanya around ten lines down:

והודעתם לבניך ולבני בניך וכתיב יום אשר עמדת לפני ה' אלקיך בחורב.

So ma hallan

באימה ביראה ברתת ובזיע, ויום אשר עמדת לפני ה' אלקיך בחורב,

how did you experience Kabbalas HaTorah by Ma'amad Har Sinai? You experienced it באימה ביראה ברתת ובזיע on the yom asher amadta. So af kan on והודעתם לבניך ולבני בניך when you're learning, when you're learning with your sons, with your grandsons, when you're learning, it should also be באימה ביראה ברתת ובזיע. So when the Ramban is referencing that, so p'shuto shel d'varim is he's referencing the af kan. But maybe not, maybe what he's really, maybe the Ramban's real kavana is that he's referencing the ma hallan, and and that when a person undertakes לכתוב חידושים בפירוש התורה, it's a bechina of Ma'amad Har Sinai. Again, because of that direct hityachasut to devar Hashem. And that's why the theme of the lack of worthiness of the נפשי יודעת מאד ידיעה ברורה etcetera far, far surpasses what the Ramban expresses in other contexts. And maybe, maybe that's also part of what the first line means here when it says בשם האל הגדול והנורא. So maybe, okay, so maybe the omek of that line is, what what does it mean if if someone comes and tells you that he is speaking in the name of so-and-so? What what does that mean? It means that the content of what he's saying is he's representing as that this is what, right, if Reuven comes and says that he's speaking in the name of Shimon, so that means that Reuven's representing that the content which he's expressing is something that Shimon has authorized, that Shimon subscribes to. Which is what a person's doing directly when he's writing chiddushim b'peirush HaTorah. Again, if you're writing a super-commentary on Rashi, so it's once removed, maybe twice removed because Rashi is usually quoting Chazal, but but you're commenting directly on on a word, on psukim b'Chumash. So how was that, how was that a justification? Let's say I break into your apartment and head straight for the cookie jar and you ask me what are you doing and I say אבל מה אעשה ונפשי חשקה בעוגיות אלו. It may be true, but it doesn't seem to be that much of a justification. Again the Ramban here is clearly paraphrasing from Ben Azzai in the Baraita quoted in Masechet Yoma. Ben Azzai didn't get married and then they said yesh na'eh doreish. He darshened about how important mitzvah peru u'revu is and he himself wasn't married. Maybe he had gotten married and got divorced because he couldn't sustain because he says אבל מה אעשה ונפשי חשקה בתורה. So it's the same question there. What's the so itachen, I don't know, but think about this possible understanding. Itachen what the Ramban means is like this. The ve'nafshi chashka ba'Torah, ve'nafshi chashka is a compelling defense if a person is supposed to develop and cultivate such a tremendous burning desire to know and understand and gain insight into Torah. A person is supposed to have this unquenchable thirst. So it can't be that the person is told that that's the mah ahavti Toratecha, that it should be to that degree ke'esh ochelah and then be told to stifle it. Back to the mashal, there's no mitzvah to have that cheshek for the cookies in the cookie jar, which is why that's not a defense, it's not an explanation for what I'm doing. But a person should have that cheshek ke'esh ochelah that the Ramban had for Torah. And if a person is supposed to have it, then it can't be that he's not supposed to act on it. And itachen that's the same pshat by Ben Azzai. Maybe that's the pshat by Ben Azzai also. Ve'chen, implicitly the Ramban seems to have a second as it were justification in addition to the אבל מה אעשה ונפשי חשקה בתורה. When he continues and says לצאת בעקבי הראשונים אריות שבחבורה to go out in the footsteps of the Rishonim, the towering, leading members of the chabura, גאוני הדורות בעלי גבורה. So how is that a second? So the Rav Zichrono Livracha, I think this is written somewhere also, but he used to say Ba'al peh, what's pshat in the beginning of shiras hayam? Right, so the shiras hayam begins:

משה ובני ישראל שרו לה' כי גאה גאה סוס ורכבו רמה בים, עזי וזמרת יה ויהי לי לישועה זה קלי ואנוהו אלקי אבי וארוממנהו.

So Moshe Rabbeinu says he wants to sing shira to Hakadosh Baruch Hu for the Nes of Yam Suf. And then in the very next posuk, זה קלי ואנוהו אלקי אבי וארוממנהו. So the Rav used to say that Moshe Rabbeinu as it were is justifying to give praise and understated praise, you know sort of similar to what we were discussing in the Tosafos about borei pri ha'eitz and al yayin, to understate praise is worse than not giving praise. So what's the justification for singing shira? So Moshe Rabbeinu says I have two justifications. Number one is zeh kaili ve'anveihu. Right? So Chazal darshan ve'anveihu Ani v'Hu is vehalachta bidrachav. Ani v'Hu, right?

מה הוא נקרא רחום אף אתה היה רחום מה הוא נקרא חנון אף אתה היה חנון.

Dehainu that the praise we give Hakadosh Baruch Hu teaches us how we're supposed to behave. That provides our moral code. And therefore out of necessity, out of necessity it's Ani v'Hu. So we need albeit that obviously we can't do it justice, we can't do it adequately, but all that notwithstanding, if it's Ani v'Hu then clearly we do need to on the human level we do need to praise Hakadosh Baruch Hu. So that's one justification. And that's my justification for singing shira says Moshe Rabbeinu zeh kaili ve'anveihu. What's the other? Elokei avi va'aromemneihu. I'm following in the footsteps of the Avos. Clearly there's an answer, there's a basis, there's a justification because I'm not innovating this. So itachen that's ad kan dvarav. That's what the Rav used to say here. So it could be that that's pshat here also when the Ramban says אבל מה אעשה ונפשי חשקה בתורה that's one justification. Again his self-confessed puniness keneged sisrei Torah notwithstanding. But the second is also it's latzeis be'ikvei harishonim. Apparently there is a justification. I'm not the one who's blazing the trail here, I'm not the pioneer. Okay we'll leave it at that for the Ramban.